Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 11 years ago.
Improve this question
Is it possible to host multiple websites that all have one single/common CMS (Joomla)?
Thanks.
Joomla offers a CMS to run a website on. Joomla uses mysql databases that just hold the information that will be shown on the content pages at the front. The way it is supposed to be used you won't be able to run multiple sites on a single cms.
You can't run 2 websites with different content on that single cms, but you can create multiple front ends on one cms. You could for example store your data using joomla and get it shown at the front using your own code. This way you will be able to have two interfaces / websites on one cms, both running on the same data.
So from what I read in your question I think the answer will be NO, unless you want to just apply another presentation to your data.
My own experience: I have used Joomla to just hold news articles that my web-master will add. I just used php to get those news-articles out of the mysql database and did that to make sure i could get my own presentation for the data displayed.
I actually beg to differ with those people that were so quick to say "NO!!" As of joomla version 1.5.x there are some components that allow you to do just that, most of them being commercial but there's also http://www.janguo.de/lang-en/Downloads/func-finishdown/31/ which is free at the moment. As of joomla version 1.6.x multiple sites will be integrated into joomla.
If what you need is to have several domains that point to the same Joomla (and to the same content) the answer is YES (see #S.Mark's answer).
If you want to use the same Joomla installation for two different websites (with different content), the answer is NO.
An alternative is to use some Joomla extension, such as:
http://extensions.joomla.org/extensions/core-enhancements/multiple-sites/5550
Yes you can, we have done this before. What you need to do is to have two databases though. We have just written about running multiple Joomla websites on the same Joomla installation. Hope you'll find it useful...
With CNAME record, you could able to mirror a web site to 2+ domains.
Related
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
I want to start a project but I am unable to select a technology. I basically work in JavaScript. So, develop a project with JavaScript both in front end and back end will be good for me. But I need a suggestion regarding a headless cms called Strapi. Why should I use it with React? What is the advantage and disadvantage of using strapi with react. Because Strapi is still fixing many bugs they had with their alpha version. So, I need a suggestion for this case.
You are not required to use React in your client application while creating a project with Strapi. The whole concept of is that Strapi is front-end agnostic which means that you can use it with your preferred framework or library.
The administration panel which is provided with your project is built with React, however it is completely different than your client application.
You already said, Strapi is a Headless CMS, which is defined as:
A headless CMS is a back-end only content management system (CMS)
built from the ground up as a content repository that makes content
accessible via a RESTful API for display on any device.
source
This explains why it is NOT A MUST to use a React Library, #scoupette pointed out. It does not work with REACT itself, it just sends you a data as a response, when you query something or gaining access to somewhere.
Strapi is meant to stay as a backend. Be responsible for all hard work like authentication, content type management and flexibility. When you create a content type in Strapi, you are not limited by creating only Posts or Pages, as it would be on a Wordpress default CMS configuration.
When you start developing in Strapi, generally is enough to control the backend and whole system you have created only by sending and receiving some JSON data between the listening server on default :1337 port. I do it with Postman. Whenever you decide to build a frontend, you start "rendering" the JSON responses got from Strapi. They might be displayed on your web app using: React, Gatsby, Angular, Next.js and many more. You can find their "Blog" demos with those frontend frameworks on the website.
Now lets have a look at the second part of the question:
What is the advantage and disadvantage of using strapi with react
Let's reassemble the question: Pros and Cons of using React with a Headless CMS. To know that you have to compare it with other opportunities we have, but that might get us out of the topic. Instead you might like to refer more experienced users of the frameworks in The Best JS Frameworks for Front End.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I must complete the comperation table below. I've searched and filled a few but i'm not sure about my answers.
Can you help me check them?
Thanks so much.
comperation table
I am working on Laravel from the last 5 years, so I can give my perspective on that. According to me, Laravel is easy to learn and fast to develop a framework.
They have artisan commands to create your basic structure very fast.
Routing - Laravel has now categorized routes according to their area, like web routes, API routes and console routes. so you can easily differentiate your routes according to their use.
Database - As you said Eloquent, it is enough powerful. you can use the DB facade as well.
HTML JSON & Image Rendering - Laravel uses a blade template engine so their helpers come very handy. e.g. #yield or #include, now they have even #slots.
helpers are available for assets.
Login - just enter one command basic login structure is ready for you. from registration to forgot password. make::auth command is there. it even creates basic database tables for you. you can override it as well. Authentication Quickstart
ACL - You are free to write your own middlewares.Middleware laravel
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
I am working on a project where I have to validate the complete site, which has around 150 pages, through W3C Markup Validation. Is there a way to check W3C Markup Validation of an entire website?
The W3C doesn't offer this on w3.org.
http://validator.w3.org/docs/help.html#faq-batchvalidation
But you can use this tool and check "Validate entire site": (Also w3.org refers to this site!)
http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/validator/
But you have a limit of 100 URLs to validate and will get this message when you reach 100 URLs:
Batch validation is limited to 100 URLs at one time. The remaining URLs were not checked.
Also there's a limit of errors displayed for each url.
The WDG offers two free solutions:
Validate entire site (select 'validate entire site')
Validate multiple URLs (batch)
You can run the validator yourself. As of 2018, W3C are using v.Nu for their validator, the code is at https://github.com/validator/validator/releases/latest and usage instructions are at https://validator.github.io/validator/#usage
For example, the following command will run it on all html files under the public_html directory:
java -jar vnu.jar --skip-non-html public_html
I use this tool bulk w3c html validator to validate my entire website
http://www.bulkseotools.com/bulk-w3c-validator.php
This tool uses W3c validator engine, you can check 500 urls at once.
I've used http://sitevalidator.com; I think it would be helpful to you.
I made this java app (Windows installer) in my spare time because I needed it at work:
https://gsoft.no/validator. It's free.
It uses either https://validator.w3.org/ or v.Nu running locally to validate an entire site.
It crawls a website and in the end makes a report with validator-links to all pages with warnings or errors. Because it crawls, all pages to be validated must be linked.
By running v.Nu locally you can validate an internal site (e.g. an intranet) which is not available online and therefore cannot be validated by online validators (unless you post the entire content of each page).
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 9 years ago.
I'd like to build a highly scalable, highly transactional web platform to run multiple websites. Product information will come from an external PIM, search will be provided by an external service and it will also need to integrate with an ERP system for order processing.
The two functional areas I have left to decide upon are the web CMS and the commerce framework. I have been looking at Sitecore, EpiServer, Magento and MS Commerce.
Whilst Episerver and Sitecore have great WCMS capabilities, they seem to lack on the commerce side and conversely, whilst Magento and MS commerce have great commerce capability, they lack on the WCMS side.
Does anyone have any experience in integrating a WCMS with a separate Commerce framework?
If so, are there any combinations you would recommend? Eg Sitecore with Magento, EpiServer with MS Commerce etc
Are the benefits of having two separate systems (great in their specific area, decoupled architecture etc) outweighed by the disadvantages (complex interfaces, less out-of-the-box functionality etc)?
Thanks in advance!
EPiServer has a Commerce-packaging since about a year... In it they have integrated with a e-commerce framework from a U.S. company, Mediachase. So to combine EPiServer with a complete commerce product that's probably the smoothest way forward if you decide for EPiServer.
I've attended a course in EPiServer Commerce and it did seem powerful but in my opinion not very pleasant to work with, neither as a developer or a webmaster. I would rather integrate on my own and fetch "commerce" objects into EPiServer pages. Then build shopping cart functionality, order flow and other integration as needed.
The most popular ecommerce package of the moment is Magento and you can do multi-store, multi-currency.
Personally I think it is better to use the full functionality of Magento including the order processing and backend tools for editing the product pages. However, there are many companies that choose not to do this, updating the product data from a backend system (or even an accounts package) and having everything else handled by other packages.
If you want to use a 3rd party CMS with Magento then it is easy if your customers don't have a 'single sign on' - you can relegate the Magento install to /store and customise the CSS to look like your main site.
Alternatively you can go with a Wordpress integration that will let customers add comments to blog posts etc.
Drupal is another package that has been integrated into a Magento build in such a way that customer information is shared between the two packages.
Scaling Magento is not easy but it is designed to scale and there are examples in the wild where lots of servers work together to serve the pages. Master/Slave databases can be used and CDN integration for serving images is out of the box.
I would advise against pulling data through from an offline-database for creating product pages. This is because you cannot tailor pages to have custom options that easily when taking the programmatic approach.
I have previously done a bespoke integration of nopCommerce into an EPiServer site and through the use of an EPiServer Page Provider I was able to create a really tight, clean integration.
I'm currently working with EPiServer Commerce and all this is done for you, though the product URLs don't live within the clean URL structure of the CMS.
For example, a category page might be at
/products/cars/
and the product it's self would be at
/ford-focus.aspx
The aspx URLs are still virtual files (they don't exist on disk) but I'm not a massive fan of the different URL structure.
I understand this is an old post, but if you are looking into sitecore then Insite software have a powerful ecommerce module for it. We are going through a similar CMS/ecom review at the moment.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 10 months ago.
Improve this question
So I actually saw a full ajax site somewhere (I forget where) and thought it would be something new and fun to try. I used an old site I had built and put it on a new server. With a little bit of jquery and ajax, I was able to make the entire site work on one page load.
My question is, what are some pros and (more likely) cons to this method?
Please note - the site works through a semi clever linking function. Everything works perfectly fine if the user doesn't have javascript enabled, the newly requested page loads like it would on any other website.
More detail -- Say the user loads the homepage of the site, then logs in. When they log in, the login box fades and reappears with user info. Other content on the page loads as necessary upon logging in. If they click a link, lets say "Articles", one column on the homepage slides up and slides back down with the articles. If they click home the articles slide up and the homepage content slides back down. Things like posting comments, viewing profiles, voting on things, etc. are all done through ajax.
Is this a bad method of web design? If so, why?
I am open to all answers/opinions.
IMO, this isn't "bad" or "good". That depends completely on whether or not the website fulfills the requirements. Oftentimes, developers working on AJAX-only sites tend to miss the whole negative SEO impact issue. However, if the site is developed to support progressive enhancement (or graceful degradation depending on your point of view), which it sounds like you have, then you're good. Only things to prepare for are times when the AJAX call can't complete as expected (make sure you're dealing with timeouts, broken links, etc) so the user doesn't get stuck staring at a loading icon. (The kind of stuff you'd have to deal with in any application, really.)
There are plenty of single-page websites out there using heavy JS and AJAX for the UI and they are great. Specifically, I know of portfolio sites for web designers and web app development teams that use this approach. Oftentimes, the app feels a bit like a flash app, but without the need for a special plugin.
"Is this a bad method of web design? If so, why?"
Certainly not. In fact, making web-pages behave more like desktop applications, whilst remaining functional to ALL users, is the holy-grail of web-design.
I say, as long as you consider ALL your users, i.e. mobile/text-only/low bandwidth/small screensizes then you will be fine. Too many developers just do it for their huge 19" screens and 10Mbps, that users to get left behind through almost no fault of their own.
It depends on the user
This relates closely to UX, IMHO, though of course it's on-topic for programming solutions.
All-AJAX is often called "managing state" 12 years after this Question was asked.
From my experience in:
Creating a platform for API plugins
Creating two of my own CMS web apps for different purposes
Managing many different WordPress.org sites for different purposes
Managing my own cloud servers for both PHP-AJAX and Node.js doing these calls
...it depends on what is most efficient for users.
Consider these scenarios:
Will users be clicking around this website all day long or for at least an hour adjusting many different options and <form> inputs?
Or will many users visit briefly to perform just a handful of quick tasks?
State-managed / all-AJAX is by far best for scenario 1, with Facebook and Gmail as prime examples.
Whole-page loads are more efficient for scenario 2, like blogs, especially with pages linked directly from search results. That might apply to webstores like Amazon, maybe, where users search Google to find one or two products, then leave.
Philosophically, I've heard that the difference is about the number of users and traffic, but I don't quite agree. It's more about how much clicking and <form> sending the primary target user will be doing.